Which one of these baptisms are works-based?

I want to make the choice when I am old enough to think about it. Truly, it is the parents that choose for you to get baptized. It doesn't matter when you get baptized but whether you do it with a true heart, and want to dedicate your life to God. Also, it is up to God whether He chooses you, regardless if you want to be baptized or not. Either way is good, but I will get baptized when I make the choice, not my parents making it for me

You must not just 'make THE choice' once, but what matters most is how you make EVERY choice EVERY day AFTER baptism, so you do not 'fall away' from your covenant obligations.

Its not a 'one and done' deal like you have been told by your fork-tongued preachers. The method of baptism you are adhering to is a works-based baptism, as if YOU are the one who chooses Christ.

Consider this:
If a person is baptized as an infant, then worships satan as an adult 20 yrs later, they condemn themselves.
Identically, If a person is baptized as an adult, then worships satan 20 minutes later, they also condemn themselves.

Point is, each person must LIVE RIGHTEOUSLY AFTER BAPTISM, regardless of when they are baptized—be it 20 minutes ago, or 20 yrs ago.

Baptism was and is simply God's covenant sign that the parents confer upon their children to show they intend to raise them Godly in a home that honors God. It places the children in Christs care, and it is the foolish disciples who would forbid the children to come to Him.

The only time in the NT church when ONLY adults were baptized, was when the whole unbelieving society just learned who Jesus was. After that, all the children of every household were baptized as soon as they were born—just like it was for OT circumcision. .

Yes, that is true. Thanks for pointing that out.

There is no promise in scripture that the physical offspring of believers are chosen by Christ. Romans 9:8.

Neither is there a command that their offspring are excluded until adulthood. Moot arguments from silence.

What we do know is that, for 2,000 yrs, all male children were given the covenant sign of circumcision as soon as they were born in a believing household. We also know that baptism replaced circumcision. Why then do we now exclude infants? Makes no sense.

Is it better to exclude innocent children from the NT church? Jesus would be angry about this:
Mar 10:14 NLT - 14 When Jesus saw what was happening, he was angry with his disciples. He said to them, "Let the children come to me. Don't stop them! For the Kingdom of God belongs to those who are like these children.

Mat 21:16 NKJV - Have you never read, 'Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants You have perfected praise'?"

Therefore, in the ideal Christian community, not only would children be baptized along with adults, but rather, only children would be baptized, and never adults, since the adults would have already been baptized by their believing parents when they were infants. Comparably, from the very beginning of the patriarchal OT Israel church age, Abraham was likely the only man who was circumcised as an adult, as all the other males throughout the Israelite ages were circumcised as children and as infants.

I see what you’re saying, but a baby cannot make the choice to accept Jesus. In order to be baptized properly, the person being baptized must understand the commitment to Christ that they are making, which a baby cannot. Christ is willing to work with everyone, we only need to accept and follow him knowingly and willingly.

Did Isaac or any child from him on have to make a personal choice to receive a sign of the covenant?
Circumcision was irrelevant if there was not a 'circumcision of the heart'—not the cutting of the flesh.
Since baptism replaced circumcision, we can use the pattern of scripture to expect the same 'baptism of the heart' to be all that matters—not the washing of the flesh.

I know we can agree that baptism doesnt save your soul, it is but a sign. Only living righteously matters. Therefore what difference does it make whether the sign is given before possessing faith, or after?
Abraham was given the sign after having faith, and Isaac (and arguably every single child after him, received the sign before they had faith)

What truly matters is HOW YOU RECEIVE THE SIGN of entrance into the covenant of Christ.
Is it better to enter it with your own strength, or as a helpless baby?

Luk 18:17 NLT - 17 I tell you the truth, anyone who doesn't receive the Kingdom of God like a child will never enter it."

Wow, I can really tell you know your way around the Bible. I still don’t subscribe to your take on this issue, but you’ve shown me that I’ve a long way to go in terms of studying. Thanks for sharing your view in a civil manner, it’s hard to find people that do nowadays.

Thanks, but the Bible isnt a very big book, so theres not much of an excuse why Christians dont all know their bibles inside out—especially preachers. There's no other book on this planet that tells you how to behave in any situation and what to expect from the choices you make, and churches are only caring about 'growth and program development'.
Oh, Judgment is coming for these modern-day preachers, I cannot wait.

Q for you though:
If baptism must be a personal decision that HAS to be made by each and every believer, what about the covenant membership of a particular person, who, throughout their entire life of 30+ yrs, has been mentally handicapped with the mind of a child, and thus never able to solemnly and publicly make their own decision about anything—let alone to wholeheartedly profess to follow Christ...should they be allowed to be baptized, or not?

If YES, then why would you deny an infant whose mind is on the same level as this mentally retarded person?

If NO, would you permit someone else—their guardian or parent, perhaps—to make that decision for them?

If this person has the capacity to understand what baptism entails and know that they cannot live without Jesus, then yes. If they don’t, however, then no.

For example a lvl. 2/3 autistic man or woman, so no, they wouldnt noticeably understand the depths of sin or its consequences. Okay fair enough.

If I may ask a further question, there are likely millions of these people in America, and thousands of them have Christian baptized parents.

Would you think it acceptable if those parents wished to speak for their children in baptism so they, too, could be baptized?

(you probly see where im going with this)

If we’re using the logic I used in my previous answer, then no

The parent cannot make such an important decision for this person, since his faith is not theirs.

But 'faith' in the sense we know it as, is not possible to obtain for these autistic kids. Anyways, thats kinda what i figured you'd say. Too bad.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I’m a relatively new Christian, and still need to study up. Thank you for showing me how long of a ways I need to go.

No church is perfect, just like we as people are not perfect. The purpose of the church is to edify and encourage each other so that we may resist the temptation of the devil. I’m not saying denominational churches are ok, because all of them verge from the truth in some way or another, but a good Christian church has people who are meek, kind, and willing to share the word of god and encourage. I still don’t align myself with your view of baptism, but God gave us the church for a reason.

I can tell, because the 'seasoned' christians/churchians are never open-minded like you are.

Truth be told, you will NOT find the whole gospel truth in any person part of a registered denomination with tax-exempt status.

Modern churches are businesses that have been systematically devised by the devil to fracture and divide the church of Christ, and fleece the sheep—not feed them.

You can only find the truth in your daily personal studies of online resources and prayer.
God will show you the way to understanding if you seek for yourself diligently and dont trust in other ppls opinions (even mine).

Hebrews 11:6 —He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

And it’s worth noting that children are not born with any sin, not even Adams.

Of course they are. Our bodies are bodies of death because of Adam's sin (which was listening to his wife, not God):
Psa 51:5-6 NLT - 5 For I was born a sinner--yes, from the moment my mother conceived me. 6 But you desire honesty from the womb, teaching me wisdom even there.

Rom 5:12 NLT - 12 When Adam sinned, sin entered the world. Adam's sin brought death, so death spread to everyone, for everyone sinned.

That said, there is a difference between Intentional Sins and Sins of Ignorance.
Intentional Sins are not forgiven after you come to the knowledge of Christ. They were not even forgiven by the OT covenant sacrifices. Christ's death does not cover Intentional Sins. His sacrifice applies only to those who "know not what they do."

Conversely, Sins that infants possess are 'sins of ignorance', which are immediately overlooked because they don't know the difference between good and evil:
1Ti 1:13 NLT - ..but God had mercy on me because I did it in ignorance and unbelief.